vocametrix_calculate_formants

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Mentions 'vowel-space stability and articulatory precision scores' but does not explain how these are derived or any prerequisites (e.g., audio quality, file format restrictions). Missing details on side effects or error conditions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two concise sentences front-load the core functionality. However, a structured list of statistics could improve scannability. No waste but minor room for optimization.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Addresses purpose and usage context but lacks details on output format, error handling, and prerequisites (e.g., expected audio duration or sample rate). For a tool with no output schema and no annotations, more behavioral context would be beneficial.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Input schema has 100% description coverage; each parameter already has a clear meaning. The description adds no extra context beyond what schema provides, meeting the baseline for high coverage without enhancement.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Clearly specifies that the tool computes F1–F4 formant statistics (mean, SD, range, CV, IQR) from sustained vowels. It lists specific clinical applications (dysarthria, vowel space analysis, cleft palate), making its purpose distinct from sibling calculate tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit use cases (dysarthria assessment, vowel space analysis, cleft palate evaluation) but does not contrast with alternative tools or state when not to use it. Lacks explicit exclusions, which is a minor gap.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.